> Also, in your post you sounded as if you were worried about how this will affect the current state of indie games, and I can assure that indie games are doing better now than they ever have.
No, not at all. But I do think it reinforces a trend of quickly producing (and even publishing) unpolished, unplayable games.
> Any of the great indie games you've played have been made by people who have previously made dozens of horrible prototypes and "Ludum dare style" games.
I'd love to see some data on that. Personally I don't think producing a string of "horrible prototypes" is a necessary introduction to game development. There are plenty of aspects of game development that aren't adequately covered by producing 48-hour throwaway demos.
> Developers don't simply go from zero to making award-winning games, there is a large amount of learning and practice that has to happen, which LD facilitates.
Except for some very rare outliers, "developers" (used here in the singular) don't make award winning games at all. An indie darling like Braid was produced at a substantial cost and with the addition of at least one artist as well as musicians. Blow didn't "jam" that game into existence. It was a very long, very difficult project that included throwing out the artwork and starting over at one point (if memory serves).
I'm cherry picking a bit there but make a list in your mind of how many great indie games were "jammed" into existence using well honed "jamming" skills. I can't think of any.
My point is that developing games people actually want to play involves "game jam skills" + n, where n probably represents over 95%. We can all jam out throwaway games to our hearts' content. If we're going to make great games or even just good games then we need to put our time into learning n. LD, given its strong following, could better serve the community by focusing more on n. I have absolutely nothing against LD or its participants, but I think it could be more than it is.
No, not at all. But I do think it reinforces a trend of quickly producing (and even publishing) unpolished, unplayable games.
> Any of the great indie games you've played have been made by people who have previously made dozens of horrible prototypes and "Ludum dare style" games.
I'd love to see some data on that. Personally I don't think producing a string of "horrible prototypes" is a necessary introduction to game development. There are plenty of aspects of game development that aren't adequately covered by producing 48-hour throwaway demos.
> Developers don't simply go from zero to making award-winning games, there is a large amount of learning and practice that has to happen, which LD facilitates.
Except for some very rare outliers, "developers" (used here in the singular) don't make award winning games at all. An indie darling like Braid was produced at a substantial cost and with the addition of at least one artist as well as musicians. Blow didn't "jam" that game into existence. It was a very long, very difficult project that included throwing out the artwork and starting over at one point (if memory serves).
I'm cherry picking a bit there but make a list in your mind of how many great indie games were "jammed" into existence using well honed "jamming" skills. I can't think of any.
My point is that developing games people actually want to play involves "game jam skills" + n, where n probably represents over 95%. We can all jam out throwaway games to our hearts' content. If we're going to make great games or even just good games then we need to put our time into learning n. LD, given its strong following, could better serve the community by focusing more on n. I have absolutely nothing against LD or its participants, but I think it could be more than it is.